similar to: [LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM

On 12/21/07, Richard Pennington <rich at pennware.com> wrote: > I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple > driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think > it works). Er. Hm. Can you explain the name? The problem with names like "ellsif" is that it sounds like "else if". I like the

I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target code generation. All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions -O5 <premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument 'machine-licm' defined more than once!

> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most > of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target > code generation. > > All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: > [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions > -O5 > <premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument

>> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file >> Phase: Preprocessing >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase >> > > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has already found one that is > working for him and that is licensed under BSD and that has some > features in it that he needs for source to source transformation. I > would like us to all

On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple > driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think > it works). > > The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing > results > for optimized and unoptimized runs: Cool, this is

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > >> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple >> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think >> it works). >> >> The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing >> results

I would really like to avoid shipping multiple preprocessors as part of the standard elsa/oink project. On 12/21/07, Taras Glek <tglek at mozilla.com> wrote: > > >> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file > >> Phase: Preprocessing > >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase > >> > > > > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has

Jay Foad wrote: >> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most >> of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target >> code generation. >> >> All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: >> [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions >> -O5 >>

Hi, I've restarted my Elsa/LLVM project after three months of having real life intrude. I upgraded my LLVM source to the current trunk. I had to make a few changes to my source, e.g. LLVMFoldingBuilder became IRBuilder and several instances of "new" became "Create". Now, a test case that previously succeeded fails. I run the following script: #!/bin/sh if [ 1 -ne 0 ]

> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors > and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly > complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc > to support N processors. Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and says elsa is far simpler. > I became interested in

Daniel Wilkerson wrote: >> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors >> and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly >> complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc >> to support N processors. > > Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and >

On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a > big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I > prefer. Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end, understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get where you're coming from though! > Since I only

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > >> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a >> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I >> prefer. > > Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end, > understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get

Hi, I've been writing an Elsa to LLVM interface. It has been going very well, I think both sets of software are very nice. At this point I've been able to compile and run a small program (sieve.c). I've also compiled a pretty complete version of printf(). (It seemed like a good choice because it touches many data types, varargs, etc.) I've had to make quite a few changes to Elsa

Hi, LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results: Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4) Release mode, but with assertions enabled LLVM srcdir == objdir # of expected passes 2250 # of expected failures 5 I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC, so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff" test the machine was swapping

Wow! Cool! Hey, if you sign my contributor agreement, we can consider making your Elsa/LLVM compiler an Oink tool. Scott's intention is for Elsa to be basically "done": that is, aside from bug fixes, it shouldn't have more features. Oink is basically a bucket into which to throw tools like this one that use Elsa as a front-end. Daniel On Dec 7, 2007 6:37 AM, Richard

Devang Patel wrote: > On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > >> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my >> code to >> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice! >> >> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold >> some >> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If

Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature project. I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page shows the comment that they only have a partial type checker. It also says their template instantiation is incomplete.

On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an > implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature > project. Not that I'm aware of. > I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify > that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page > shows the

On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my > code to > use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice! > > My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold > some > operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If I implemented > some of > these unhandled cases